THE COMMON CORE FACE-OFF: HIDING THE TRUTH ABOUT CHOICE & CHARTER
SCHOOLSPART 2 of 2

By
Anita Hoge
July 1, 2014
NewsWithViews.com

Here
is the Set-up

Lets
say the Re-authorization of ESEA is passed with the “choice”
amendments. Your child has already been identified by the national database
through the state longitudinal data system. Your child has been identified
for funding under Title I because of the Flex Waiver. Now, with this
“choice” the Title I funds will " follow" your
child to whichever school you choose.

Here
is an example of what can happen once your child has the “choice”
funds in his/her backpack, with their name allotted to the scholarship,
and you (the parent) decide to use this "choice" funding to
send your child to Immaculate Conception Catholic School in Washington,
Pennsylvania. This school will be mandated by federal law to comply
with ESEA, better known as Common Core. This will be disguised as academic
standards or College and Career Ready Standards (CCRS). Under this sort
of “choice,” there can be no discrimination
for this Catholic school to turn down a student. [NOTE: This changes
the hope that a private school can bypass this issue by just refusing
federal funding. The private school must refuse the
child. This is where discrimination comes into play.] So, Immaculate
Conception must enroll your child. This would be the same for any
private school or religious school.

Immaculate
Conception will be mandated to administer the federal test. This national
test will also evaluate the teachers. If Immaculate Conception School
is not teaching Common Core, they will be targeted
as a priority or focus school to be brought into compliance with the
law. This will be the demise of “private"
in your group of "choice" schools. This will be the end of
truly private education in America, because your private or religious
school just became a government school—it must use the standards
passed in your state (Common Core warmed over), and take the assessment
aligned to the national curriculum and national test. All schools become
government schools with “choice.”

Is
This the End of Public Schools?

Now,
what happens to the old public school that your child just left? Your
old public school will struggle. Your local district must pay for at
least 50% of your child’s stipend or scholarship with taxes collected
locally so that your child can go to another school. Your federal Title
I “Choice” fund pays the other 50%. Your public school loses
100% of funding for every student who leaves to go to a "choice"
school. Your public school system locally will collapse, because there
will not be enough money in the budget to support your community’s
school. Plus, your tax money will be following students everywhere,
even across state lines.

Your
locally elected school directors will be fired or retired. What happens
to "voting" for locally elected representatives? What happens
to your tax base, to property taxes that were collected to run your
neighborhood school? Where will property taxes go if there are no public
schools? What happens to wealthier districts if funding for students
becomes equalized? This is the "punch in the gut" that Secretary
Duncan was talking about when he chastised soccer moms that were
against Common Core.

Meanwhile,
everyone is fiddling around with Common Core, states are taking the
caps off the number of charter schools, expanding them, closing down
public schools, and sometimes transforming a public school into a charter
school. Parent trigger bills are allowing parents to set up charter
schools. Charter schools are not private schools. Charters
are public schools. They have with no elected boards, but
they do have access to public funds.

A
June 24, 2014 article in the Detroit
Free Press explains the powerless authority of
a Charter School Board when told, "none of the board’s
business" as to how the school was run.

"In
its investigation into how Michigan’s charter schools perform
and spend nearly $1 billion a year in taxpayer dollars, the Free Press
found board members who were kept clueless by their management companies
about school budgets or threatened and removed by a school’s authorizer
when they tried to exercise the responsibilities that come with their
oath of office. Board members removed by an authorizer have no recourse
in Michigan."

“There
have been board members who have basically said, ‘We tried to
make changes, we tried to instill our rights as board members overseeing
a public school’ and were essentially told to back off,”
said Casandra Ulbrich, vice president of the state Board of Education,
which sets education policy and advises lawmakers. “You have to
question who’s really running the show here because technically
and legally, it’s supposed to be the board.” In traditional
school districts, with elected boards, members can’t be removed
for asking tough questions. Voters get to decide whether to re-elect
a board member." [emphases mine]

By
supporting the Common Core agenda you have just agreed to diminish our
American representative form of government by supporting “choice”
and charter schools. Taxation without representation. Will taxes be
centralized or regionalized toward a central base? Will the people have
any power or voice to change this system?

So,
think again. "What is your choice?" Charter
schools, private schools, religious schools, and remaining public schools—all
conforming to the ESEA federal law with Common Core embedded in the
standards. Your state will continue to reduce caps on charter schools,
and some public schools will become community “hub centers”
or school-based clinics. And lest you forget, SB 1094 also changed the
definition of a “Family Member.” You, the parent are demoted
to a “partner” who is responsible for your child along with
many "other" government officials. Please do an Internet search
for the definition of partnership. You won't like it when the government
takes away your authority as a parent, your voice and your representative
voting power is lost forever and your child belongs to the state, with
reduced in authority to “partner.” And if your child moves
to another city or state to go to a school more suited to his/her abilities
and can produce more “human capital” from your child, who
will “partner” with him/her there?

Will
these ‘Conservative’ groups and Obama give you the straight
talk about ESEA and ESEA Flexibility Waivers? Will they tell you the
truth about what will happen to your private, Catholic, or Christian
school with federal “choice”? No! They are NOT talking about
it! They continue to insist that “choice” is the answer.
Keep in mind that there is a profit motive for many of these groups
to continue to advocate this phony “choice.”

What
Will Happen if the U.S. Department of Education is Abolished?

So,
what about abolishing the U.S. Department of Education? Watch the switcheroo!

Who
better to monitor human capital than the U.S. Department of Labor? Plus,
another aspect of SB 1094 (Re-authorization of ESEA) is that they want
a national assessment board that monitors compliance to the national
test, most likely the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
Well, this "appointed" commission was the plan all along,
too.

The
Gordon Commission has already been set up by Obama and the Educational
Testing Service (ETS),the contractor for NAEP, which calls for an unelected
board to manage the national test. Want to talk about top down control?
Why not just use the U.S. Department of Labor to monitor the “human
capital” (your child’s economic value to the state) that
is being processed by all schools in America? The national testing,
along with the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES), will
monitor compliance from the national database on ALL aspects of education.

Who
needs the U.S. Department of Education? Who needs state control of funding
when Title I federal funds "follow the child" and do NOT pass
through state government? Who needs locally elected school boards when
public schools fail?

Teachers
unions are girding for a tough fight to defend tenure laws against a
coming blitz of lawsuits — and an all-out public relations campaign
led by former aides to President Barack Obama.

But,
wait a minute! Wasn't that the so-called ‘conservative’
FreedomWorks agenda? So, now you know the rest of the story. Who is
on whose side?

Teachers
will be manipulated to leave the education system through the Value-Added
Measurement Model (VAMM) incorporated into the ESEA Fexibility Waiver.
Teachers will be evaluated by how their students score on the national
test. Teachers MUST teach to the test, and must be
evaluated with the Charlotte Danielson Evaluation, spelled out in the
Flex Waivers. [NOTE: Charlotte Danielson was an official with the Northwest
Regional Educational Laboratory during development of the original Course
Goals Collection, the forerunner of Outcome-Based Education and the
Common Core.] All curriculum used will be developed with total alignment
to the standards aligned system (SAS), which matches curriculum, teaching,
and testing to the standards. Teachers must perform and teach the standards,
period.

Removing
teacher tenure easily allows traditional teachers who know what is best
for children, to be replaced if they do not conform to the Common Core
agenda. The Fexibility Waiver is very clear about replacing the principals
and the teachers not in compliance. Young, inexperienced Teach For America
members are standing on the sidelines ready to jump at the chance to
replace traditional teachers. Eager and committed, they will comply
with the plan.

All
barriers are now removed for federal takeover.

A
Little Background on Choice

When
the controversy exploded in the 1990's over Outcome Based Education
(OBE), the education bureaucrats did not expect the explosion of fury
from parents against OBE and the subjective learning outcomes that were
trying to be placed in every state at that time. OBE failed. The bureaucrats
have gotten smarter, but very little else has changed.

Copyright
the standards, call them academic, and align them to “Race to
the Top” funds so every state could be the same. Change Title
I in ESEA for every child to be funded the same, equity in education.
Test every child to see where their weaknesses are in meeting standards
that were expanded to values and attitudes. Then use Special Ed funds
for remediation or intervention to meet those standards. Monitor and
force teachers to teach the standards, and implement choice to throw
the net over everyone. Here was the sentiment then, as it is now:

Subscribe to NewsWithViews Daily E-Mail Alerts!

“TO
OBE OR NOT TO OBE?” WAS THE QUESTION POSED BY MARJORIE LEDELL,
ASSOCIATE of William Spady’s in his High Success Network in her
article for Educational Leadership’s January 1994 issue.
On page 18 of her article we read the following:

Finally,
raise the real issue and depend on democracy. Don’t let “to
OBE
(common core) or Not to OBE (common core)”
or “to implement or not implement efforts to improve student learning”
cloud the overdue national debate about whether public education
should exist or be replaced with publicly funded private education.

In
1990 a federal investigation was completed against the Pennsylvania Department
of Education, after filing a federal complaint against the Educational
Quality Assessment, EQA, & the US Department of Education's National
Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, under the Protection of Pupils
Rights Amendment. Forced the Pennsylvania EQA to be withdrawn. Forced
the US Department of Education to do their job to investigate the psychological
testing of children without informed written parental consent. NAEP was
never investigated because the Department said I didn't have standing,
although documents had proven that NAEP did experimental research &
used different states to pilot their agenda by embedding their test questions
into the Pennsylvania EQA as well as other state tests.

Subject
& main researcher for the book, Educating for the New World Order.
My story is told about an incredible journey into the devious & deceptive
operations of our government to change the values, attitudes & beliefs
of American children to accept a new world order. The first to document
the expansive data collection operation of our government establishing
micro-records on individual people in the United States. Experimentation,
illegal testing, & data collection is exposed.

Lectured
all over the Unites States in the 90's about illegal & controversial
testing, curriculum, & collection of data by our government. Arranged
& lectured town hall meetings all across the state of Pennsylvania
to withdraw affective student learning outcomes to stop Outcome Based
Education. In January of 1992, parents in Pennsylvania won the battle
against OBE when the Independent Regulatory Review Board had requested
that the State Board of Education remove all outcomes which dealt with
attitudes, habits, traits, feelings, values, & opinions which are
difficult & subjective to measure & that the remaining outcomes
be defined & coordinated with academic requirements that can be measured.
The battle continues.